“Lebanon Debate”
Israel’s retreat from carrying out a large-scale military operation against the southern suburbs of Beirut was not a passing event or the result of one factor. Rather, it was the result of a complex network of political and diplomatic contacts that were active at more than one internal, regional and international level during the past hours, and ultimately led to containing the escalation and preventing the confrontation from moving to a more dangerous stage.
At a time when the impression prevailed that the Iranian position alone was the decisive factor in braking the escalation, private information from “Lebanon Debate” reveals that parallel Arab and international efforts played a fundamental role in pushing the American administration to intervene quickly to curb the impulse of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and prevent the targeting of the southern suburbs of Beirut, in a step that reflects the presence of an international and regional will to prevent the Lebanese situation from exploding at this delicate stage.
According to the information, these efforts coincided with an official Lebanese move led by the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, through direct channels with officials in the American administration, in parallel with diplomatic contacts accompanied by Ambassador Nada Moawad as part of continuous communication with the American side, in an attempt to confirm the seriousness of any new escalation and its repercussions on Lebanese and regional stability.
In parallel with the Lebanese movement, a remarkable Arab role emerged, especially on the part of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which intensified its contacts during the last hours with decision-making circles in Washington, seeking to prevent the expansion of the circle of confrontation. These efforts intersected with the official position announced by the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which condemned the Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory, and affirmed the Kingdom’s rejection of any infringement of Lebanon’s sovereignty or any incursion into its territory.
The Saudi position was not limited to the political aspect only, but also carried dimensions related to the future of the Lebanese internal settlement, as Riyadh stressed the importance of adhering to the Taif Agreement as the constitutional and political reference for extending the authority of the Lebanese state over its entire territory. It also renewed its support for the path of exclusivity of weapons in the hands of the Lebanese state.
In this context, information reveals that the Saudi envoy, Prince Yazid bin Farhan, made a lengthy call with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri following the announcement of the cessation of escalation, in a step that reflected a direct Saudi interest in following up on the repercussions of the next phase, whether at the level of security calm or the political track related to the ongoing negotiations.
The Egyptian role also emerged through a high-ranking security delegation currently in Beirut, where information indicated that the members of the delegation participated in the contacts that preceded the decision to contain the escalation, and at the same time they are continuing their meetings with Lebanese officials to discuss ways to address files related to strengthening the role of the state, most notably the file of arms exclusivity.
As for Qatar, it, in turn, entered the line of communications through active diplomatic action during the past hours, as part of the Arab and international effort aimed at preventing Lebanon from sliding into a wide confrontation, which reinforced the impression of the existence of integrated Arab coordination to keep pace with Lebanese developments at this sensitive stage.
These moves gain additional importance on the eve of the arrival of French presidential envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian to Beirut, where he is expected to hold a series of meetings with senior Lebanese officials to follow up on the results of recent contacts and explore opportunities to build on them in the next stage.
In parallel with the Arab and international movement, data reveal an intense communications movement led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri during the past hours, within the framework of keeping pace with developments and trying to anticipate the course of the regional negotiations and their repercussions on Lebanon.
In this context, Berri received a call from the Speaker of the Iranian Shura Council, Muhammad Baqir Qalibaf, during which they discussed field and political developments related to the Israeli escalation in Lebanon, especially those related to the displacement policy targeting the residents of the south and the southern suburbs of Beirut. According to the information, during the call, the Iranian side stressed the need for stopping the war on Lebanon to be a basic priority in any future regional arrangements or understandings.
In a related context, the Speaker of the House of Representatives sent his political aide, Representative Ali Hassan Khalil, to the Qatari capital, Doha, on a far-flung visit that carried more than one message and more than one goal. Information indicates that the visit focused mainly on exploring the truth about the Iranian position on including the Lebanese file in any possible understanding between Tehran and Washington, in addition to exploring the atmosphere surrounding the negotiations related to the Iranian nuclear file, and anticipating its repercussions on Lebanon and the region.
Follow-up sources confirm that this simultaneous political movement reflects a growing awareness among various parties that Lebanon has become part of the broader regional negotiating scene, and that any future settlement in the region will not be far from the Lebanese file, whether in terms of establishing a ceasefire or addressing the outstanding political and security issues.
These data raise a basic question about whether the Five-Year Committee has practically returned to the forefront of the Lebanese scene, but in a more dynamic and flexible form than before. The Saudi-Egyptian-Qatari-French intersection, in addition to the direct American presence, suggests that there is a serious attempt to reconstitute a political and diplomatic umbrella capable of keeping pace with the ongoing negotiations and preventing any security setback that might reshuffle the cards in Lebanon and the region.
Accordingly, it seems that preventing the targeting of the southern suburb was not just a local success in containing a passing crisis, but rather it may constitute the beginning of a new phase of political and diplomatic activity, the title of which is consolidating the calm and linking the Lebanese arena to the path of regional and international settlements that is being shaped behind the scenes.
